Could someone expain why some speakers are said to be better suited for HT and some are better for music?
I have aways thought that a good speaker sys is a good speaker for anything. Good sound is good sound.

Is this just a marketing gimmick? Are their specific differences in them aside from maby a smaller size for HT?

many ht subs tend to be boomy when listening them with music. while preforming quite well with movies. at least for some
reason: ht subs are sometimes made to have a big "bump" in responce curve.
Makes explosions louder.
For some this is cool.
I kinda.. ah, well why bother to say.
Anyways HT subs are -the less expensive ones with a lotha THX, made in china, CE, ISO and THANX (sarcasm) markings on with large optimal for HT things on the package- are "designd" for power handling, different Qtc than ones ment for proper listening.
Some quality ones will do quite well for both. But actualy it is easy to tell what not to purchase.
If its 4th or 6th order, then its not for quality music. It can still preform quite well with them explosions. Sympthones of "mono-tone" sounding and !KA-BOOM! -ing is sorthof natural for small 4th and 6th order ones.

on the otherhand, when someone says "its better for ht than for music" i would like to ask:
what about moooovies that have MUSIC??

Last year I had the fortune to test 2 completely different speakers systems.
Both systems were in the same room, used the same processor (Denon 4308), same amp (Bryston 9BSST2) and same source (PS3 - Bluray).

System 1 - Fantastic for music, great for Theater.
System 2 - Great for music, fantastic for Theater.

So both systems were wonderful, and one wasn't better than the other...just different. What were the differences?

System 1 had amazing imaging and soundstage reproduction, and an inherant 'warmth' to the sound. As long as you were in the sweet spot. Moving outside the narrow sweet spot caused the image to pull to one side. As well panning from mains (Summit x) to center or surounds was not as seemless as system 2.

System 2 had detail and clairity that was never shrill, but very revealing. This system also had a cohearant blend between all 5 speakers. The sweet spot was larger than with system 1. However they were too revealing with some music sources which caused this system (in comparison to System 1) to sound overly clinical.

While these were 2 different types of systems they did highlight the possible issues that can cause a speaker to be ideal with either Music or Movies.

Are movies commonly mixed with a different/less than flat freq than music because the consumer is most likely is using a less than flat reponse for play back and/or thinking that is what consumers want?

I think the mastering for movies is far far superior to that in most recent music. In fact, I imagine that most audio engineers expect the music to be played back at 128 kilobits/sec vs movies that have had to be theater quality for a very long time.

:)ensen.

__________________
Those who claim to be making history are often the same ones repeating it.

I think the mastering for movies is far far superior to that in most recent music. In fact, I imagine that most audio engineers expect the music to be played back at 128 kilobits/sec vs movies that have had to be theater quality for a very long time.